can anyone suggest a decent example of a SMARC-based YP build?

can anyone suggest a decent example of a SMARC-based YP build?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  just started perusing the docs on "SMARC" SoMs:

https://sget.org/updated-smarc-specification-v2-2-released/

where various vendors offer a number of SMARC-compatible modules like
this:

https://www.isee.biz/products/smarc-modules
https://www.ezurio.com/system-on-module/nxp-imx8/nitrogen8m-plus-smarc
https://www.bcmcom.com/bcm_product_SMA-IMX6.html

and then more than likely someone who wants to build a product around
that fairly standardized format and spec needs to design a (custom,
proprietary?) carrier board like:

https://www.ezurio.com/system-on-module/accessories/universal-smarc-carrier

so even if there's a wild variety of carrier boards, one would think
that the SMARC 2.2 spec will still mean a lot of the configuration is
consistent.

  any informative examples of that in github? or elsewhere?

rday

Re: [yocto] can anyone suggest a decent example of a SMARC-based YP build?

[Quentin Schulz]

Hi Robert,

On 7/29/25 12:08 PM, Robert P. J. Day via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> 
>    just started perusing the docs on "SMARC" SoMs:
> 
> https://sget.org/updated-smarc-specification-v2-2-released/
> 
> where various vendors offer a number of SMARC-compatible modules like
> this:
> 
> https://www.isee.biz/products/smarc-modules
> https://www.ezurio.com/system-on-module/nxp-imx8/nitrogen8m-plus-smarc
> https://www.bcmcom.com/bcm_product_SMA-IMX6.html
> 
> and then more than likely someone who wants to build a product around
> that fairly standardized format and spec needs to design a (custom,
> proprietary?) carrier board like:
> 
> https://www.ezurio.com/system-on-module/accessories/universal-smarc-carrier
> 
> so even if there's a wild variety of carrier boards, one would think
> that the SMARC 2.2 spec will still mean a lot of the configuration is
> consistent.

Not sure what you're actually asking here. What "configuration" are you 
talking about?

For what it's worth, we have three Qseven SoMs (PX30 Ringneck, RK3399 
Puma, RK3588 Tiger) for the same carrierboard (Haikou) and they don't 
share much outside from this. The SoC is different, which means 
different controllers which means different drivers. I guess you could 
have a kernel with drivers for all controllers enabled so you could 
share the binaries between them (we don't, but we could). While it is a 
standard, there are some features that aren't supported because the SoC 
doesn't support them (e.g. no PCIe on PX30 so the slot on Haikou is not 
usable with that SoM). Then because they are based on different SoCs 
with a different magic header used by the BootROM to detect a valid 
bootloader, you need different bootloader binaries (but maybe with x86 
that'd be fine). Theoretically, you should be able to use an x86 SoM or 
an Aarch64 or whatever else architecture SoM with the same carrierboard, 
so you wouldn't be able to boot the same binary image in any case.

> 
>    any informative examples of that in github? or elsewhere?
> 

Unclear to me what you're actually asking for, can you rephrase maybe?

Cheers,
Quentin

Re: [yocto] can anyone suggest a decent example of a SMARC-based YP build?

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hi Robert,

On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 12:08 PM Robert P. J. Day via
lists.yoctoproject.org <rpjday=crashcourse.ca@lists.yoctoproject.org>
wrote:
>   just started perusing the docs on "SMARC" SoMs:
> ...
> and then more than likely someone who wants to build a product around
> that fairly standardized format and spec needs to design a (custom,
> ...
> so even if there's a wild variety of carrier boards, one would think
> that the SMARC 2.2 spec will still mean a lot of the configuration is
> consistent.
>

No. SMARC (loosely or more strictly, depending on who you ask)
defines a common connector pin-out, voltages, and that's about it.

Any "configuration" for the SoC, device tree, etc. are all different,
let alone the Yocto build configuration.

Regards,

Leon

Re: [yocto] can anyone suggest a decent example of a SMARC-based YP build?

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 944 bytes --]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025, Leon Woestenberg wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 12:08 PM Robert P. J. Day via
> lists.yoctoproject.org <rpjday=crashcourse.ca@lists.yoctoproject.org>
> wrote:
> >   just started perusing the docs on "SMARC" SoMs:
> > ...
> > and then more than likely someone who wants to build a product around
> > that fairly standardized format and spec needs to design a (custom,
> > ...
> > so even if there's a wild variety of carrier boards, one would think
> > that the SMARC 2.2 spec will still mean a lot of the configuration is
> > consistent.
> >
>
> No. SMARC (loosely or more strictly, depending on who you ask)
> defines a common connector pin-out, voltages, and that's about it.
>
> Any "configuration" for the SoC, device tree, etc. are all different,
> let alone the Yocto build configuration.

  i've finally figured that out after reading more of the spec and
looking at various carrier boards.

rday